Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
ckDol
phi
j
nandI
ri
svanderTui
n
NewMat
eri
ali
sm:
Int
erv
iews&Car
togr
aphi
es
i
.i
nter
views>3.“
mat
terf
eel
s,conv
erses,
suf
fer
s,desi
res,
year
nsandr
emember
s”
3.“
Mat
terf
eel
s,conv
erses,
suf
fer
s,desi
res,
year
nsandr
emember
s”
I
nter
viewwi
thKar
enBar
ad[
1]
I
sthi
simmanentenfol
dingofmat t
erandmeaning,whichyour
efert
oas“agent
ial
reali
sm,”and
whi
chwenamea“ newmat eri
ali
sm,”thequi
ntessenceofy
ourcri
ti
queofbot
hthesciencesand
t
hehumani
ti
es?
KarenBar ad:
Thecoreofy ourquest
ionIhav
etosayisspoton, butsi
ncey oustat
ewhatIam
doi
ngi ntermsofcrit
iqueIwantedtostar
tbysayi
ngsomet hingaboutcri
ti
que.Iam not
i
nterestedincri
ti
que.Inmyopinion,
cri
ti
queisov
er-r
ated,
ov er-
emphasized,andover-
uti
l
ized,
to
thedet r
imentoff emi nism.AsBr unoLat oursi gnalsinanar t i
cleent i
tled“ Whyhascr it
iquer un
outofst eam?Fr om Mat tersofFactt oMat t
er sofConcer n”( 2004) ,criti
quei sat ool thatkeeps
gettingusedoutofhabi tperhaps, buti tisnol ongert het ool neededf ort heki ndsofsi tuations
wenowf ace.Cr iti
quehasbeent het ool ofchoi cef orsol ong, andourst udent sf indt hemsel v es
sowel l-
trainedi ncr i
tiquet hatt heycanspi toutacr it
iquewi ththepushofabut ton.Cr it
iquei s
tooeasy ,especi allywhenacommi t
mentt or eadingwi thcar enol ongerseemst obea
fundament alelementofcr iti
que.SoasIexpl aintomyst udent s,readingandwr itingar eethical
pract i
ces, andcr i
tiquemi ssest hemar k.Now, Iunder standt hattherei sadi fferentv alencet o
thenot i
onofcr iti
quei nEur opet hant herei si nt heUni t
edSt ates;nonet heless, It hinkt hispoi nt
i
si mpor t
ant .Critiquei sal lt
ooof tennotadeconst ructi
v epr act i
ce,thati s,apr act i
ceofr eadi ng
fortheconst i
tutiveexcl usionsoft hosei deaswecannotdowi thout, butadest ruct i
vepr acti
ce
meantt odi smi ss, tot ur naside, toputsomeoneorsomet hingdown—anot herschol ar ,another
femi nist,adi scipline, anappr oach, etcet era.Sot hisisapr acticeofnegat i
v i
tyt hatIt hinkis
aboutsubt ract i
on, distancingandot her i
ng.Lat oursuggest st hatwemi ghtt urnt oAl anTur i
ng’ s
notionoft hecr iti
cal i
nst eadofcr itique( Tur ing1950) ,wher egoi ngcr i
ti
cal refer st ot henot i
onof
crit
ical mass—t hati s, whenasi ngl eneut ronent ersacr it
ical sampl eofnucl earmat erialwhi ch
producesabr anchi ngchai nr eact i
ont hatexpl odeswi thi deas.Asaphy sicistIf indt his
met aphorchi ll
ingandomi nous.I nst ead, bui l
dingonasuggest i
onofDonnaHar away , whatI
proposei st hepr act iceofdi ff
ract i
on, ofr eadi ngdi ffr
act i
v el
yf orpat ternsofdi ffer encest hat
makeadi f
ference.AndImeant hatnotasanaddi ti
venot i
onopposedt osubt ract ion, asIwi ll
explaini nal ittl
ebi t.Rat her,Imeant hati nt hesenseofi tbei ngsuggest ive,cr eat i
v eand
visi
onar y.
Iwoul dl i
ket oof fert woexampl est ot hinkwi thi nengagi ngy ourquest ion.Ir ecent lygav ea
keynot eataconf er enceatt heSt ev ensI nst i
tuteofTechnol ogy , [2]whi chi sinNewJer sey .They
arest artingav eryi nnov ativer ev ampi ngoft heirHumani ti
espr ogr am.Theyar ei nter est edi n
taki
ngi nsight sf r
om sci encest udi es, andr unni ngt hem backi nt otheHumani ti
es.Thi si st he
wayt heyt alkabouti t
.Whatt heypr oposei st her ever seofhowsomewoul dt hinkoft he
potent i
al impactofsci encest udies: nott ouset heHumani ti
est ot hi
nkaboutt heSci encesbut
touset heSci encest or ethinkt heHumani ti
es.Thi si st hei rproj ectandi twasav eryi nter esti
ng
confer ence.Butt her ewassomet hi ngaboutt hewayi nwhi chi twasbei ngf ramedov erall t
hatI
want edt oseei fIcoul dgeti ntoconv ersat i
onwi tht hem about .Fi rstofal l,ther ewast henot i
on
thatwhati sneededi sasy nthesi s; asy nt hesisoraj oiningoft heHumani tiesandt heSci ences
asift heywer ealway sal r
eadysepar ater at hert hanal way sal readyent angl ed.Sot hatt her e
woul dbeSci encewi thmat ter soff act ,andnat ur e,andsoon, ononesi de, andHumani ties,
meani ng, values, andcul t
ur e,ont heot her ,andsomehowt hatt her ewoul dbeaj oiningoft he
two.So, wet alkedaboutt heway si nwhi cht her ear eent anglement st hatal readyexi stbet ween
theHumani ti
esandt heSci ences; theyhav enotgr ownupsepar atelyfrom oneanot her .Iwas
j
ustpoi ntingoutt ot hem someoft hel imi tationsoft hinki nganal ogicallyasi nl ooki ngf ormi rror
i
magesbet weent heSci encesont heonehandandt heHumani tiesont heot her .AndIwas
tel
li
ngt hem aboutt hiswonder f
ul stor ythatShar onTr aweekt ellsaboutwhenshewasdoi ng
fi
eldwor kont hehi ghener gyphy sicscommuni tyatt heSt anf ordLi nearAccel er ator( SLAC) .She
i
sst andi ngi nahal l atSLAC, andnot icesaphy sicistst aringatpi cturesoff r
act al i
magesont he
wall.Shegazesupont heimagesandaskshi m: “Cany out ellmewhati ssobeaut i
ful about
thosei mages? ”Thephy sicistt urnst oherwi tht hi spuzzl edl ookonhi sf aceandsay s: “Iam not
reall
ysur ewhyy ouaskedt hequest ion.I t’sself -evident !Ev erywher ey oul ooki tist hesame. ”
Andofcour sef emi nistsar enott rainedt ol ookort akepl easur ei nev er ythingbei ngt hesame,
buttot hi
nkaboutdi fferences.
Andt hen,j
ustreall
ybrief
lymysecondexampl eandIpr omiseyouIwi ll
notgoonthislongabout
everyquestion,
butjusttosetupsomet hingsinthebeginning…Itaughtalect
urecoursethis
quar t
ercal
led“Feminism inSci
ence,
”whichhadSci encestudentsinthecl
assaswel l
as
studentsfr
om theHumani ti
es,
theSoci
alSciences,andtheAr t
s,andwewer etal
kingaboutthe
notionofscienti
fi
clit
eracyandhowscientif
icli
ter
acyhasgr ownupt obethesoleresponsibi
li
ty
oftheSci ences.Butwhati ssci ent i
ficli
teracy?Wespentmi l
li
onsofdol larsoni ti
nt heUni t
ed
Statesandwear enotr eallysur ewhati tmeansatal l
,asamat teroffact .Andaf t
erspendi ng
mi l
li
onsofdol larsbywhat ev ermeasur eispr ov idedf orsci ent i
fi
clit
eracy ,west i
llhavet hesame
percent agesofsci ent i
ficlit
er acyasbef or e.Accor dingt ot hesemeasur es, scientifi
clit
er acyis
betweent hr eeandsi xper cent .Andt hatisact ual lythesamenumberofsci ent i
stsand
engineer sthatwehav e.Thatt ellsyousomet hingaboutt hewayi nwhi chsci entif
icli
teracyi s
beingunder st ood, andhowi tisbei ngmeasur ed, andhowi tisbeingthoughtabout ,andwho
needst ot aker esponsi bili
tyfori t,andsoon.Andsowet alkedaboutt hef actt hatadi fferent
kindofl it
er acyi sact uallyrequi redf ordoingsci ence.Thatconsi derationoft heet hi
cal,soci al
andl egal impl icationsofv ar i
ousnewsci encesandt echnol ogiesafterthef actisnotr obust
enough.Forexampl e,weconsi deredt henewf ieldofbi oet hicsinwhi chet hi csistakent obe
solelyamat terofconsi deringt hei magi nedconsequencesofsci entif
icpr ojectst hatareal ready
given.Butt henot ionofconsequencesi sbasedont hewr ongt empor ali
ty :askingaf terpot enti
al
consequencesi st ool i
ttle,tool ate,becauseet hicsofcour se, i
sbeingdoner i
ghtatthel ab
bench.Andso, asf orwhati ttakest obesci entificallyli
terat e,t
hequest ioni swhatdoesi ttake
i
nor dert oi dent ifythev ari
ousappar at
usesofbodi l
ypr oduct i
onthatar eatst akeher e.Andsoi n
ordert oident ifyt hoseweneedamuchbr oadersenseofl iteracyandweneedal lki
ndsof
peopl earoundt hel abbench, sot hatsci entifi
cl iteracyshoul dnol ongerbeseenasbei ngsol el
y
theresponsi bilityoft heSci ences.It hi
nkt hatisoneoft heway sinwhi chwegetour selv esina
l
otoft r
oubl ei nt ermsofeducat i
on.
Q2:
Coul
dyouexpl
aint
ousabi
tmor
ewhat
,how,
orwhot
heagenti
nagent
ial
real
i
sm “
is”
?
KB: Fi
rst,Iwantt osayt hatIt r
yt ost ayawayf rom usi ngt het erm“ agent ,”orev en“ actant,
”
becauset heset ermswor kagai nstt herel
at i
onal ontol ogyIam pr oposing.Al sot henot i
ont hat
thereareagent swhohav eagency ,orwhogr antagency ,say , tonon- humans( thegr anti
ngof
agencyi sani ronicnot ion,no? )
, pull
susbacki ntot hesameol dhumani stor bitsov erandov er
again.Andi tisnoteasyt oresistt hegravitati
onal forceofhumani sm, especi allywheni tcomes
tothequest ionof“ agency .
”Butagencyf ormei snotsomet hingt hatsomeoneorsomet hing
hast ovaryingdegr ees, si
nceIam t ryi
ngt odispl acet hev erynot i
onofi ndependent lyexist
ing
i
ndi vi
duals.Thi sisnot ,howev er, t
odenyagencyi nit simpor tance, butont hecont rary,t
or ewor k
thenot i
onofagencyi nway sthatar eappr opr i
atet or el ational ontologies.Agencyi snothel d,it
i
snotapr oper tyofper sonsort hings; r
ather,agencyi sanenact ment ,amat terofpossi bil
iti
es
forreconfiguringent angl ements.Soagencyi snotaboutchoi ceinanyl iber al humani stsense;
rather,i
tisaboutt hepossi bili
ti
esandaccount abili
tyent ai l
edi nreconf i
gur i
ngmat eri
al-
discursi
veappar atusesofbodi lypr oducti
on, includi ngt heboundar yarticulat i
onsandexcl usi ons
thataremar kedbyt hosepr actices.Oneoft hei temst haty ouaskedabouti st hehowofagency ,
andi nasense, thehowi spreci
sel yinthespeci fi
cityoft hepar ti
cul arpract ices, soIcannotgi ve
agener alanswert ot hat,butper hapsIcansaysomet hi nghel pful aboutt hespaceof
possi
bil
i
tiesf
oragency
.
Anot herex ampl ethatmaybehel pf ul herei sanexampl ethatHar away( 2008)t alksabout.Iti
s
anexampl et hatisr aisedbyBar bar aSmut s, whoisanAmer i
canbi oant hropologistwhowentt o
Tanzani at oi nvestigat ebaboonsi nt hewi ldf orherdoctoralresearch.Shei st ol
dasasci enti
fic
i
nv estigatorofnon- humanpr imat est okeepherdi stance,sot hatherpr esencewoul dnot
i
nf l
uencet hebehav i
oroft her esear chsubj ectsthatshewasst udying.Di stancei sthecondition
ofobj ect i
vity
.Smut st al ksaboutt hef actt hatthisadvicewasacompl etedi sasterforher
resear ch,thatshef oundher selfunabl et odoanyobser vati
onssi ncet hebaboonswer e
const ant l
yat tenti
vet owhatshewasdoi ng.Shef i
nall
yreali
zedt hatt hiswasbecauseSmut s
wasbehav ingsost rangel yt ot hem, theyj ustcoul dnotgetov erher .Shewasbei ngabadsoci al
subjecti nt heircir
cl es.Theonl ywayt ocar r
yonandt odor esearchobj ectivel
ywast obe
responsi ble;thatis, thatobj ectivi
ty, at hemet hatfeministsciencest udi eshasbeen
emphasi zingal lalong, i
st hef actt hatobj ectivi
tyisamat terofresponsi bil
it
yandnotamat t
erof
distancingatal l.Whatul t
imat elydi dwor kwast hatshel earnedtobecompl etel
yr esponsiveto
thenon- humanpr imat es, andi nthatwayshebecameagoodbaboonci ti
zen.Theycoul d
under stand, atleasti nt ell
igibl
yt ot henon- humanpr imates,andasar esul ttheyleftheralone
andwentaboutt
hei
rbusi
ness,
maki
ngi
tpossi
blef
orhert
oconductherr
esear
ch.
Q3: I
nMeet i
ngt heUni verseHal fwayandi nsev eraljournalarticles,youf oll
owHar awayi n
proposi ng“dif
fracti
on,”ther elati
onal nat ureofdi ff
erence, asamet hodologyf ortr
eat i
ng
theor i
esandt extsnotaspr eexisti
ngent ities,butasi ntr
a-action, asforcesf rom whichot her
textscomei nt
oexi stence.Ont heot herhand, y
ouf ocusst ronglyont hewor kofNi elsBohr
throughouty ourwor k.Yourr e-writi
ngoft hephi l
osophyt hati sact i
vei nallofhistextsseemst o
benei therduti
ful norundutiful t
ohi si deas.Andy ety ourwor kcanber eadasoneoft he
strongestcomment ari
esont hewor kofBohrnowav ai
labl
et oacademi cs.Perhapst hef i
rstone
thatsucceedsi nr eadinghimi ntotheHumani ti
es.Nextt oBohr ,ofcour se,youreadmanyot her
scientistsandschol arsli
keEi nstein, Schr ödinger,butalsoMer leau-Pont y,Harawayofcour se,
Deleuze, andLat our.Especiallyasconcer nst hephilosopher sandt hoseschol arstradit
ionall
y
notr eadwi t
hintheSci ences, youseem t or eadthem v eryaf f
irmat i
vely,albei
tinpassi ng.
Q4:
Alt
hough“
gender
”ist
het
ermt
hatseemst
obet
heunquest
ionabl
efoundat
ionoft
hef
iel
dof
genderst udi
es,it
sconcept uall
egacyhasbeenspeci f
iedasAngl o-
Amer icanandl i
nguisti
c.
Femi ni
stscholarsworkingwi t
hgenderusual l
ysetupanar gumentagainstabi ologi
cal
determinism orbiol
ogicalessenti
ali
sm, andascri
beaf i
xedsexual ont
ologytomaj ortradi
tions
i
n( scholarl
y)thoughtaswel lastoCont i
nentalf
emini
stphilosophy(e.
g.t heworkofLuce
I
rigaray)
.FélixGuattar
i oncesummar izedhistakeontheseissuesinani nter
view,stat
ing:
I
fGill
esDel euzeandIhav eadopt edtheposi t
ionofpracticall
ynotspeaki
ngofsexual it
y,and
i
nsteadspeaki ngofdesire,i
t’
sbecauseweconsi dert
hatt heprobl
emsofl i
feandcr eati
onare
nev
err educibl
etophy si
ologicalf
unctions,reproducti
vef unct
ions,
tosomepar ti
culardimension
oft
hebody .Theyalwaysi nv
olveelement sthatareeitherbeyondtheindi
viduali
nthesoci al
or
pol
iti
calfi
eld,orel
sebef oretheindiv
idual l
evel(Guatt
ar i
andRol ni
k[1982]2008,411).
Thisnon-represent
ational
isttakeon“sexualdif
ference”seemstocomecl osetoy ourreadingof
thi
sconcept .Yourproposal f
oranont o-
epist
emol ogyshowsushowmat ter(amongot hers
bodil
ymat ter)andmeani ngar eal
waysalreadyimmanent lyenf
oldedandtransi
ti
onal.Yet
i
nsteadoft akingatermf rom psychoanal
ysis(l
ikedesire)
,youbri
nginphy si
cs(Bohr’
s
conceptualapparatus).Howt henisquantum physicshelpi
ngyoui nar
ti
culat
ingyourfemi nism?
Iwil
lgi
veyouasuper-
fastlessonofwhaty ouneedtoknowaboutquant
um physi
csandt hen
cometowhatisinChapter7t oshowy ousomeoftheresul
tsandwhatIthi
nktheimpli
cati
ons
arei
ntermsofthi
nki
ngaboutquest i
onsofsoci
alj
usti
ce,whi
chIthi
nkarekeyhere.Soherei
s
mycrashcour
seonquant um physics.
Iwi l
l nowmov eintowhati si nChapt er7becauseIt hink, agai n, thatt herear ei mpor tantf emi nist
“l
essons”her e.Andofcour sewhenIsay“ feministl essons, ”thati sadi stortingshor thandIneed
toqual i
fy.Because, ofcour se,whatIam pr esent i
ngwi thagent ial r
ealism al readyhasf emi nist
l
essonsbui l
tintoit,andt hati spar toft hebeaut yofChapt er7.Atl eastformei tist he
i
ncr ediblesat isf
act i
onoft akingi nsi ghtsf rom f emi nistt heor y,ont heonehand, andi nsi ght s
from phy si cs,ontheot her,andr eadi ngt hem t hroughoneanot heri nbui l
dingagent ial realism.
Andf rom t heregoingbackandseei ngifagent ialrealism cansol vecer tainki ndsoff undament al
probl emsi nquant um phy sics.Andt hef actt hati tisr obustenought odot hat ,andt hatf emi nist
theor yhasi mportantt hingst osayt ophy si
csi samazi ng, absol utelyamazi ng, andkeyt ot he
pointIwantt omakeaswel l.Andi nf act, whenIwasabl et oact uallyshowt haty oucoul ddo
sciencewi thagent ialrealism andbr ingt hesei mpor tanti nterest s, thequest ioncamet omeof
whet herornotIshoul dpubl i
sht hisr esultinaphy sicsj ournal orl eavei tfort hebook, sot hat
phy sicist
swoul dhav etogot oaf emi ni
stbooki nor dert of indoutsomeoft hephy sics.Ichose
thel atter
, butinret r
ospectIt hinki twasami stake, becausei ttookav erylongt i
mef ort hebook
tocomeout( mor et hant hreey ear s)andbecausei tseemst hatsomephy sicistsareengagi ng
wi t
hmyi deaswi thoutacknowl edgi ngi t
.Pr acticesofpubl i
shi ngar eal way spol it
ical.
Comingbackt ot hei ssueathand, BohrandHei senber gweret otall
yatodds.Notonl yBohrand
Ei
nstein, butalsoBohrandHei senber g.Heisenber gt houghtthatt her easonwhyi tchanges
fr
om awav epat ternt oapar ticlepatternwheny ouchanget heappar at usi sbecausey ouare
di
sturbingt hepar ti
cle.Andt hispl acesal imi tonwhatwecanknow, becauseeach
measur ementdi stur bswhaty ouar emeasur i
ng.Andhecal ledt hatt he“ (Hei senber g)
UncertaintyPr i
nci ple,”whichIhav efoundi smor ef ami l
iart
oEur opeanaudi encest han
Americanaudi ences.ButBohrar gueswi t
hHei senber gandsay st hathemakesaf undamental
err
orinpr oposinguncer taint
y ,andwhati sati ssuei snotuncer taintyatal l
, butrat her
i
ndetermi nacy .Thati s,
whenwemakeameasur ement ,whathappensi st hati ti
snotamat t
erof
di
sturbingsomet hingandourknowl edgei suncer tainasar esult,butr athert herear enot
i
nherentpr operti
esandt herear enoti nherentboundar i
esoft hi
ngst hatwewantt ocallenti
ti
es
befor
et hemeasur ementi ntra-acti
on.Thati s,Bohri ssay i
ngt hatthingsar ei ndet erminate;t
here
arenot hingsbef oret hemeasur ement ,andt hatt hev eryactofmeasur ementpr oduces
deter
mi nat eboundar i
esandpr oper t
iesoft hings.So, hi
sisanont ological pr inci
pl erathert
han
anepistemol ogical one.Inot herwor ds, forBohrpar ti
clesdonothav eaposi tioni ndependentl
y
ofmymeasur i
ngsomet hingcal l
edposi ti
on.
Sot hepointher ei
s:howdophy sicist sint
erpretthis?Thewayphy sicist
si nterpr etthisisby
sayingthatwehav etheabi l
it
ytochanget hepast .BecauseIam changi nghowi twentt hrough
theslitaft
erithasalreadygonet hr ought heslits.Sot her eisat al
kabouter asi ngwhatal ready
was, r
estoringthediffr
actionpattern, andbasi call
ymov ingt heclockbackwar dsorchangi ng
howt hepar ti
clewentthroughaf teri thasalreadygonet hrough: t
heabi l
itytochanget hepast.
NowIwantt osuggest,though,thatt hatisav eryconv enientkindofnost algicf antasy .Icannot
blamephy sicistsf
orengagi ngint his.Ithi
nkt hisisav er yseduct i
vef antasy .Per hapsatone
ti
meoranot herallofuswi shthatwecoul dchanget hepastandt hemar ksl ef
tonbodi es,and
changet heway sinwhi chwemat er i
alizedthewor l
d,especi allywhenwear enotbei ngcar ef
ul,
thatwewoul dli
ketoundowhathasbeendone, t
hatwewoul dli
ketogobackanddoi t
diff
erentl
y.Buti st
hisreall
ywhatt hisexper i
menti stellingusaboutwhati spossi bl
e?
Ittur
nsoutt hatifwel ookatt hisexperimentmor ecar efull
y—itisal l
explainedi nChapt er7—t he
origi
nal dif
fracti
onpat ter
nisnotbei ngrestor
edwhat soeverandt her eisnocompl eteerasure
goingonher eatall.Whati shappeni ngher ei
st hatt heexper imenti snotaboutengagi ngapast
thatalreadywas.See, weassumet hattimeisagi v enext ernal
ity,j
ustapar amet erthatmar ches
forward, andthatthepastal readyhappenedandt hepr esent,thatmoment“ now”j ustsli
pped
awayi ntot hepast,andt hatthef ut
ur eisyett
ocome.Buti fweex aminet hiscar ef
ully,
agai n
usingthei nsightsfrom feministtheor y
,from post-structurali
sttheor y,
andt hingsthatCultural
Studieshasbeent elli
ngus, andsoon, andbringt hem i ntothephy si
csher e, whatwecanseei s
thatwhati sgoi ngonact uall
yi sthemaki ngoft empor ali
ty.Therear equest ionsoft empor al
ity
thatarecomi ngt otheforeher e.Whatwear eseei ngherei sthattimeisnotgi ven,itisnot
universal
lygiven,butrat
hert hatt i
meisarticulatedandr e-synchronizedthr
oughv arious
mat eri
alpracti
ces.Inotherwor ds,j
ustl
ikeposi ti
on,moment um, wav eandpar ti
cle,timeitsel
f
onlymakessensei nthecont extofpart
icularphenomena.Sowhati sgoingonher eisthat
physicist
sar eactuall
ymaki ngt imeinmar kingt i
me, andthatt hereisacertainwayi nwhi ch
whatwet aketobet he“past ”andwhatwet aket obet he“present”andthe“ fut
ure”ar e
entangledwi t
honeanot her .Whatwehav el earnedfrom thisexper i
mentist hatwhatexi stsare
i
ntra-acti
veent angl
ement s.Thati stheonlyr easonwegetadi ff
racti
onpatternagai n,bytheway .
WhatIam tryi
ngt omakecl earis—allofthisisananswert oyourquest i
on,bel
ieveitornot —a
sampleofwhatIhav elearnedf r
om engagi ngwi t
hquantum physicsthathelpsmef ur
thermy
underst
andingoff eministissuesandpr actices.Mypassionformywor kisutt
er l
yand
completel
ygrounded, andhopef ull
yal wayswi thi
tsfeetatt
achedt otheground, i
nquestionsof
j
usticeandethics.Thisiswhatt otall
ydrivesme.SoIt hi
nkthereisawayi nwhi chthephy sics
hereactual
lyhelpsmet obr i
ngani mportantmat eri
ali
stsensetoDer ri
deannotionsofjustice-t
o-
come.Thatisnotj usti
cewhi chwepr esumeweknowwhati tisinadv anceandwhi chisforever
fi
xed.Sojusttoendt hisshor tanswerwi t
hacoupl eofquotesfrom Derri
da:
[Theconcerni
s]notwithhori
zonsofmodi f
ied—pastorf ut
ure—presents,
butwitha“past
”that
hasneverbeenpresent,andwhichneverwil
lbe, whosefutur
et ocomewi l
lneverbea
product
ionorareproducti
oninthefor
m ofpr esence(Derr
ida[1968]1982,21;
origi
nal
emphasis).
Andf
urt
her
mor
ethat
:
Nojusti
ce[ …]seemspossi bl
eort hi
nkablewi t
houtt heprinci
pleofsomer esponsi bi
lity
,beyond
al
lli
vingpr esent,wit
hint
hatwhi chdisjoi
nst heli
vingpr esent,
beforetheghost softhosewho
ar
enoty etbor norwhoareal r
eadydead[ …]
.Wi t
houtt hisnon-contemporaneit
ywi thitsel
fofthe
l
iv
ingpr esent[ …]wit
houtthisresponsibi
li
tyandt hisrespectforjusti
ceconcerningt hosewho
ar
enott her e,ofthosewhoar enol ongerorwhoar enoty etpresentandli
v i
ng,whatsense
wouldther ebet oaskthequest i
on“ where?”“wheret omor r
ow? ”“whit
her
? ”(Derr
ida[ 1993]2006,
xvi
i
i;ori
gi nalemphasis).
Sot hisi
sanexampl eofwhatIl ear nedf rom mydi f
fracti
veengagement swithphy
sics: what
responsibi
lityentail
sinouract iveengagementofsedi ment i
ngoutt hewor l
dincert
ainki ndsof
way sandnotot hers.Beingat t
entivet oway sinwhichwear er e-doing,wit
heachintra-
act i
on
mat eri
all
yre-doingt hemat eri
alconf iguri
ngsofspacet i
memat teri
ng.Thepastandt hepr esent
andt hefuturear ealway sbeingrewor ked.Andsot hatsay sthatt hephenomenaar edi ff
racted
andt empor all
yandspat i
all
ydistributedacr ossmultipleti
mesandspaces, andthatour
responsibi
litytoquest i
onsofsoci alj
ust i
cehav etobet houghtabouti ntermsofadi ff
erentkind
ofcausality.Itseemsv eryi
mpor tantt omet obebringingphy sicst ofemini
sm aswel las
feminism tophy sics.(Tounder standmyr esponseassomet hingl ear
nedf r
om physi
csand
appliedtofemi nism istohav emi sunder stoodsomet hingfundament alaboutwhatIam t ryi
ngto
say.)
Ourquestionthenwoul
dbehowt ounderstandthi
srel
ati
onal
ontol
ogythatr
eject
st he
metaphysicsofwhatusedtobecal
l
ed“ r
elata,
”ofwordsandthi
ngs.Howisanethicsatwor
kin
howmat tercomestomatter?
Q6: Finall
y,i
fyouthenproposeamat eri
ali
stethi
csthroughphy sics,si
mi l
artothewaypeopl e
l
ikeBadi ou(2007)andMei l
lassoux([2006]2008)re-absol
utizethescopeofmat hemat i
cs,you
i
ndeedst i
ruppost-Kant
ianacademi a.Thishast ohaveconsequencesf orhowy ouvaluevarious
discipli
nes.Notfal
li
ngintothetrapsofdiscipli
nari
ty,mult
i-
disci
plinari
ty,i
nter
-di
scipl
inar
ity
,or
post-disci
pli
nari
ty,
howwoul dy outhenqual i
fyyourmanifestoforacademi cresearch?
KB:Wel l
,manifestoisat hingthatmyf r
iendandcol leagueDonnaHar awaycangeti nto,butI
cannotclaimthatterm.[ Laughs.]Ofcourse,shemeansi tir
onicall
y.Agenti
alreali
sm i
snota
manifesto,i
tdoesnott akef orgrantedthatalli
sorwi llorcanbemademani f
est.Ont he
contr
ar y
,iti
sacal l
,apl ea,aprovocati
on, acry,
apassi onatey ear
ningforanappr eci
ationof,
att
entiontothetissueofet hical
ityt
hatrunst hr
ought hewor ld.Ethi
csandjusticeareatthecore
ofmyconcer nsorr ather,i
trunst hr
ough“ my”verybeing, al
lbeing.Again,
forme, ethi
csi snota
concernweaddt othequest ionsofmat ter,
butratheristhev erynatur
eofwhati tmeanst o
matter.
Not
es
Thistextistheresultofani ntr
a-activ
eev ent(“Meet i
ngUt rechtHalfway ”
)t hattookpl aceon
June6, 2009att he7t hEuropeanFemi nistResear chConf erence,hostedbyt heGr aduat e
GenderPr ogrammeofUt rechtUni ver
sity.Theaut horswoul dli
ketot hankt heCent erf or
AdaptiveOpt i
csattheUni versi
tyofCal i
forni
a, SantaCruzandt heInfrastructureleDienst
Centrumgebi edatUt r
echtUni v
ersityforpr ovi
dingt hevideoconf erencingf acili
ti
es,Hel een
Klompf ortranscri
bingtheev ent,andt heaudi encei nUtrecht(esp.Magdal enaGor ska, Sami
Torssonen,andAl i
ceBr eemen)andSant aCr uz( esp.Karen’spartnerFer nFel dmanandher
caninecompani onBi nawhower ewi l
li
ngt ositthroughat ranscontinentalintervi
ewwel lbefor
e
thesuncameupont hewestcoastoft heU.S.)forat t
ending.ret
urnt otext
Sci
ence,
Technol
ogy
,andt
heHumani
ti
es:
ANewSy
nthesi
s,Apr
il24‐
25,
2009.
ret
urnt
otext
Cont
ent
sNextSect
ionPr
evi
ousSect
ion
DOI
:ht
tp:
//dx.
doi
.or
g/10.
3998/
ohp.
11515701.
0001.
001
Publ
i
shedby
:OpenHumani
ti
esPr
ess,
2012
Host
edbyMi
chi
ganPubl
i
shi
ng,
adi
vi
sionoft
heUni
ver
sit
yofMi
chi
ganLi
brar
y.
Formor
einf
ormat
ionpl
easecont
actmpub-
hel
p@umi
ch.
edu.